MINUTES

CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD REGULAR MEETING

Miami Shores Village

November 6, 2003

 

 

The regular meeting of the Miami Shores Village Code Enforcement Board was held on Thursday November 6, 2003, at the Miami Shores Village Hall.  The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman Barry Perl.

 

 

PRESENT:                   Barry Perl, Chairman

                                    Barry Asmus

                                    John Patnick (Arrived at 6:35PM)

                                    Robert Vickers

                                    Manny Quiroga

                                    Rod Buenconsejo

                                    John Busta

 

           

ALSO PRESENT:       Al Berg, Code Enforcement and Planning and Zoning Director

                                    Anthony Flores, Code Enforcement Officer

Hillary Skumanich, Code Enforcement Officer

Richard Sarafan, Village Attorney

                                    Irene M. Fajardo, Administrative Assistant.      

 

                                   

 

All persons testifying were sworn in at this time.

 

1. A)    OCTOBER 2, 2003 MINUTES:

 

Mr. Quiroga made a motion to approve the October 2, 2003, minutes with the amended corrections.  Mr. Buenconsejo seconded the motion.  The vote was unanimous in favor. 

 

2. B)    FIRST HEARING

 

Case #: 2003-03981

Owner: Amelia La O

Address: 53 NE 102 St.

Violation: Failure to maintain parkway/Lack of off street parking.

Section: 20-17; 520(i)/ 521(b)1(d)

 

The officer, Hillary Skumanich, testified that a violation still existed on the property.  Pictures were submitted to the Board as evidence of the violation.  The attorney, Mr. Kircher, was there to represent the owner and present the case.  Mr. Kircher agreed that a violation exists and requested more time for the owner to come into compliance.  He explained that the owner is an elderly widow who has been trying to come into compliance.  Mr. Kircher also explained that there is a tree where the parkway would be installed and that she would need to remove that tree first.  The property owner, Ms. La O, needs more time in order to have the money to make the necessary repairs. The Board discussed the property’s condition and inquired on the amount of time that the owner would need to come into compliance.  Mr. Kircher stated that ninety days would be reasonable if the Board allowed it.  Staff recommended approval for the additional time.

After further discussion from the Board, Mr. Vickers moved for a finding of fact and a conclusion of law that a violation exists according to Sections 20-17;520(i)/521(b)1(d) of the Miami Shores Village Code.  The violator shall correct the violation in (90) ninety days and shall immediately notify the Code Enforcement Officer when the property is brought into compliance.  If compliance is not completed in (90) ninety days, the Code Enforcement Officer is to report back to the Board and the Board may then assess a fine against the violator in the amount of $25.00 a day, starting on the date of original compliance given in the Notice of Violation. This will constitute a lien on the property of the violator.  Costs in the amount of $15.00 per violation are hereby assessed to recoup the Village’s expenses in prosecuting the violations to date.  Mr. Quiroga seconded the motion.  Motion passed 6-1. (Mr. Asmus voted no).  

 

Case #: 2003-03955

Owner: Antonio Fernandez

Address: 9333 N. Miami Ave.

Violation: Failure to maintain parkway/Lack of off street parking.

Section: 20-17; 520(i)/ 521(b)1(d)

 

 

The officer, Hillary Skumanich, testified that a violation still existed on the property.  Pictures were submitted to the Board as evidence of the violation.  The property owner, Antonio Fernandez, was there to present the case.  Mr. Fernandez stated he found that a violation existed after purchasing the property but that he is in the process of bringing the property into compliance.  He requested additional time from the Board to comply.  The Chairman, Barry Perl, disclosed that he lives across the street from the property in questioned and confirmed that the owner has been steadily making improvements.  Staff recommended additional time for compliance.

After further discussion from the Board, Mr. Quiroga moved for a finding of fact and a conclusion of law that a violation exists according to Sections 20-17;520(i)/521(b)1(d) of the Miami Shores Village Code.  The violator shall correct the violation in (60) sixty days and shall immediately notify the Code Enforcement Officer when the property is brought into compliance.  If compliance is not completed in (60) sixty days, the Code Enforcement Officer is to report back to the Board and the Board may then assess a fine against the violator in the amount of $25.00 a day, starting on the date of original compliance given in the Notice of Violation. This will constitute a lien on the property of the violator.  Costs in the amount of $15.00 per violation are hereby assessed to recoup the Village’s expenses in prosecuting the violations to date.  Mr. Buenconsejo seconded the motion.  Motion passed 6-1.  (Mr. Asmus voted no). 

 

 

 

Case: 2003-04171, 4175, 4283

Owner: Phyllis Russell

Address: 1061 NE 91 Terr

Violation:  Unsightly fascia, soffit, and house exterior/Improper treatment of refuge/Deteriorated driveway and approach.

Sections: Bldg. 12-133/ 9-2(b)(c);9-5/ 520(h)(i)

 

The officer, Hillary Skumanich, testified that a violation still existed on the property.  Officer Skumanich stated that the owner applied for a permit to paint and requested additional time for compliance.  Pictures were submitted to the Board as evidence of the violation.  Markus Walters, the son of the property owner, was there to present the case.  Mr. Walters agreed that violations exist on the property.  Mr. Walters stated that he is in the process of bringing the property into compliance.  He explained that he needed additional time to repair the driveway since there is a Black Olive tree in which the roots are causing cracks on the existing driveway.  He has been in contact with DERM and with Miami Shores Public Works in regards to the removal of the Black Olive tree.  Mr. Walters explained that he needed additional time to find estimates for the removal of the tree.  The Board discussed the condition of the existing driveway and the removal of the Black Olive tree.  Chairman Perl stated that the Board would make separate motions for each of the cases. 

In regards to case 2003-04283, Mr. Quiroga moved for a finding of fact and a conclusion of law that a violation exists according to Sections 520(h)(i) of the Miami Shores Village Code.  The violator shall correct the violation in (60) sixty days and shall immediately notify the Code Enforcement Officer when the property is brought into compliance.  If compliance is not completed in (30) thirty days, the Code Enforcement Officer is to report back to the Board and the Board may then assess a fine against the violator in the amount of $25.00 a day, starting on the date of original compliance given in the Notice of Violation. This will constitute a lien on the property of the violator.  Costs in the amount of $15.00 per violation are hereby assessed to recoup the Village’s expenses in prosecuting the violations to date.  Mr. Buenconsejo seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

In regards to case 2003-04171, Mr. Quiroga moved for a finding of fact and a conclusion of law that a violation exists according to Sections 12-133 of the Miami Shores Village Code.  The violator shall correct the violation by December 3, 2003 and shall immediately notify the Code Enforcement Officer when the property is brought into compliance.  If compliance is not completed by December 3, 2003, the Code Enforcement Officer is to report back to the Board and the Board may then assess a fine against the violator in the amount of $25.00 a day, starting on the date of original compliance given in the Notice of Violation. This will constitute a lien on the property of the violator.  Costs in the amount of $15.00 per violation are hereby assessed to recoup the Village’s expenses in prosecuting the violations to date.  Mr. Buenconsejo seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

In regards to case 2003-04175, Officer Skumanich stated that someone at the property dumps their furniture outside to be picked up by Public Works.  She stated that there have been complaints about the dumping by other neighbors but that she did not have the pictures to submit to the Board.  Officer Skumanich stated that the case was currently closed but requested a Repeat Order in case the violation is repeated.  The Board inquired about not having the pictures as evidence of the violation.  Richard Sarafan, The Village’s attorney, stated that the Board motions according to the evidence that is presented to them including the property owner’s testimony.  Mr. Walters agreed that a violation existed on the property.  The Board inquired about the code sections that were being violated.  Mr. Sarafan read the code sections pertaining to the violation and stated that they did not cover the nature of the violation.  After a brief discussion, the case was withdrawn.

 

Case: 2003-04169, 42

Owner: James and Jane Dentico

Address: 9280 Biscayne Blvd. /10055 Biscayne Blvd.

Violation:  Unsightly fascia, soffit, house exterior/ Parking on grass

Section: Bldg. 12-133/521(b)1(d)

 

The officers, Anthony Flores and Hillary Skumanich, testified that violations still existed on the properties.  Officer Skumanich introduced case 2003-04169.  The attorney, Frank Wolland, was there to represent the owner and present the case.  Mr. Wolden explained that the Notice of Violation did not clearly specify the nature of the violation.  The Board reviewed Mrs. Dentico’s case file and stated that they completely understood the nature of the violation as stated in the notice.  Officer Skumanich testified that she had been in contact several times with the owner in regards to the violation. 

In regards to case 2003-04169, Mr. Asmus moved for a finding of fact and a conclusion of law that a violation exists according to Sections 12-133 of the Miami Shores Village Code.  The violator shall correct the violation by December 3, 2003 and shall immediately notify the Code Enforcement Officer when the property is brought into compliance.  If compliance is not completed by December 3, 2003, the Code Enforcement Officer is to report back to the Board and the Board may then assess a fine against the violator in the amount of $100.00 a day, starting on the date of original compliance given in the Notice of Violation. This will constitute a lien on the property of the violator.  Costs in the amount of $15.00 per violation are hereby assessed to recoup the Village’s expenses in prosecuting the violations to date.  Mr. Buenconsejo seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

Officer Flores presented case 2003-04217.  He explained that Mrs. Dentico had removed the vehicles from the property but that she had partly resodded the yard.  Mr. Wolland stated that the owner agrees to resod the areas necessary and requested sixty days for compliance.  The Board stated that sixty days is more time than necessary to resod. 

In regards to case 2003-04217, Mr. Asmus moved for a finding of fact and a conclusion of law that a violation exists according to Sections 521(b)1(d) of the Miami Shores Village Code.  The violator shall correct the violation in fifteen (15) days and shall immediately notify the Code Enforcement Officer when the property is brought into compliance.  If compliance is not completed in fifteen (15) days, the Code Enforcement Officer is to report back to the Board and the Board may then assess a fine against the violator in the amount of $25.00 a day, starting on the date of original compliance given in the Notice of Violation. This will constitute a lien on the property of the violator.  Costs in the amount of $15.00 per violation are hereby assessed to recoup the Village’s expenses in prosecuting the violations to date.  Mr. Vickers seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

Officer Flores presented case 2003-04219.  Officer Flores stated that painting was done without a permit and needed to get approved.  Pictures of painting in progress were submitted to the Board as evidence.  Mrs. Dentico maintained that she was only “touching up” the areas around her patio.  She later obtained a permit application and was waiting to get approval for the color. 

In regards to case 2003-04219, Mr. Vickers moved for a finding of fact and a conclusion of law that a violation exists according to Sections Bldg 6-4 of the Miami Shores Village Code.  The violator shall correct the violation in fifteen (15) days and shall immediately notify the Code Enforcement Officer when the property is brought into compliance.  If compliance is not completed in fifteen (15) days, the Code Enforcement Officer is to report back to the Board and the Board may then assess a fine against the violator in the amount of $25.00 a day, starting on the date of original compliance given in the Notice of Violation. This will constitute a lien on the property of the violator.  Costs in the amount of $15.00 per violation are hereby assessed to recoup the Village’s expenses in prosecuting the violations to date.  Mr. Buenconsejo seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

 

Case: 2003-04212

Owner: Green Lawrence

Address: 10675 NE 11 Ave.

Violation:  Unauthorized construction and alteration

Section: Bldg. 6-4

 

The officer, Anthony Flores, testified that a violation still existed on the property.  Pictures were submitted to the Board as evidence of the violation.  Officer Flores stated that the owner came in to get a painting permit, which was approved, but ended up painting the wrong area of the property.  The property owner, Mrs. Lawrence, was there to present the case.  Mrs. Lawrence agreed that a violation existed and requested additional time for compliance.  The Board stated that the owner can come in and apply for a permit and color approval using the same color she originally applied for.  After a brief discussion, Mr. Vickers made a motion to continue the case for sixty (60) days.  Mr. Buenconsejo seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

 

Case: 2003-04238

Owner: Ignacio and Ana Soto

Address: 137 NE 106 St.

Violation:  Unauthorized construction and alteration

Section: Bldg. 6-4

 

The officer, Anthony Flores, testified that a violation still existed on the property.  Pictures were submitted to the Board as evidence of the violation.  Officer Flores stated that Mr. Soto had erected a seven foot aluminum fence which was partly reduced to six feet.  The entrance through the fence which is a double door gate still remains seven feet tall.  The property owner, Ignacio Soto, was there to present the case.  Mr. Soto explained that he thought he had come into compliance once he reduced the fence.  He was not aware that he also needed to reduce the double door gate.  James Rogers, who was a building official for several cities in Dade and Broward County, was there to testify on behalf of Mr. Soto.  Mr. Rogers stated that the double door gate was very harmonious and appealing.  The Board agreed that the gate was very nicely done and requested that Mr. Soto attend the Planning and Zoning Board for approval.  After a brief discussion, Mr. Quiroga made a motion to continue the case for sixty (60) days.  Mr. Vickers seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

 

 

Case: 2003-04249

Owner: Success Pierre

Address: 75 NW 110 St.

Violation:  Unauthorized construction and alteration

Section: Bldg. 6-4

 

The officer, Anthony Flores, testified that a violation still existed on the property.  Pictures were submitted to the Board as evidence of the violation.  The property owner, Success Pierre and her daughter Kathy Pierre, were there to present the case   Mrs. Pierre does not speak English so her daughter will be speaking on her behalf.  Ms. Pierre agreed that a violation existed and requested additional time for compliance. 

After further discussion from the Board, Mr. Vickers moved for a finding of fact and a conclusion of law that a violation exists according to Sections 6-4 of the Miami Shores Village Code.  The violator shall correct the violation in (30) thirty days and shall immediately notify the Code Enforcement Officer when the property is brought into compliance.  If compliance is not completed in (30) thirty days, the Code Enforcement Officer is to report back to the Board and the Board may then assess a fine against the violator in the amount of $25.00 a day, starting on the date of original compliance given in the Notice of Violation. This will constitute a lien on the property of the violator.  Costs in the amount of $15.00 per violation are hereby assessed to recoup the Village’s expenses in prosecuting the violations to date.  Mr. Quiroga seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

 

Case: 2003-04104

Owner: Gladys Yamir Abreu

Address: 366 NE 99 St.

Violation:  Unsightly fascia, soffit, house exterior

Section: Bldg. 12-133

 

The officer, Anthony Flores, testified that a violation still existed on the property.  Pictures were submitted to the Board as evidence of the violation.  The property owner, Gladys Abreu, was there to present the case.  Ms. Abreu agreed that a violation existed and requested an additional sixty days to come into compliance.  She stated that she already applied for a permit. 

After further discussion from the Board, Mr. Busta moved for a finding of fact and a conclusion of law that a violation exists according to Sections 12-133 of the Miami Shores Village Code.  The violator shall correct the violation in (60) sixty days and shall immediately notify the Code Enforcement Officer when the property is brought into compliance.  If compliance is not completed in (60) sixty days, the Code Enforcement Officer is to report back to the Board and the Board may then assess a fine against the violator in the amount of $25.00 a day, starting on the date of original compliance given in the Notice of Violation. This will constitute a lien on the property of the violator.  Costs in the amount of $15.00 per violation are hereby assessed to recoup the Village’s expenses in prosecuting the violations to date.  Mr. Vickers seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

 

 

 

 

 

Case: 2003-04203, 2003-04282

Owner: Edwin Reeder

Address: 525 NE 93 St.

Violation: Permitted uses: single family/Auto repairs in residential zone and junk car on premises.

Section: Sche. Reg 400/401/501(k)

 

The officer, Hillary Skumanich, testified that a violation still existed on the property.  Pictures were submitted to the Board as evidence of the violation.  Officer Skumanich stated that the property is now in compliance but that the owner has been written several times for the same violation.  She stated that cars were being repaired on the property and that there were different vehicles on the property at different times.  She also stated that the tags on the vehicles did not belong to the property owner.  Officer Skumanich requested that a Repeat Order be issued to the property owner.  The Board discussed the evidence presented by Officer Skumanich.  After a brief discussion, Mr. Quiroga moved for a finding of fact and a conclusion of law that a violation existed and that it has been corrected.  The property owner shall comply with Sections Sche. Reg 400/401 and 501(k) in the future.  A repeat violation, if observed, shall be an immediate fine, even if corrected.  Mr. Vickers seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

 

Summary Adjudication: Case #’s: 2003-03856, 2003-03942, 2003-03957, 2003-04061, 2003-04064, 2003-04102, 2003-04117, 2003-04129, 2003-04143, 2003-04158, 2003-04167, 2003-04179, 2003-04180, 2003-04181, 2003-04192, 2003-04194, 2003-04195, 2003-04206, 2003-04207, 2003-04225, 2003-04320, 2003-04265, 2003-04305, 2003-04307, 2003-04309, 2003-04310.

 

Chairman Perl read each case and address into the record and asked if anyone was present.  No one was present.

The officer, Anthony Flores, testified that Affidavits of Non-Compliance and evidence of violation existed in each of the files.

 

Mr. Busta made a motion for a summary adjudication of all such cases to include a finding of fact and conclusion of law that a violation exists as charged in the respective notice of violations issued therein and that, in each case, the offending party will correct the violation within the time period specified by the staff in the staff recommendations for these hearings, and will immediately notify the code enforcement officer when the property is brought into compliance.  In each such case, if the violation is not brought into compliance within such time periods, the code enforcement officer may report this back to the Board in accordance with the Board’s rules and regulations at which time a fine is hereby authorized to be automatically assessed against the violator in the respective daily amounts specified in staff’s recommendations for tonight’s hearing, retroactive to the original compliance deadline, which will constitute a lean on the property of the violator.  Further, with respect to each of the cases, costs in the amounts specified in staff’s recommendations for tonight’s hearings are hereby assessed in order to recoup the Village’s expenses in prosecuting the violations to date.  Mr. Buenconsejo seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

 

3.C)     PENALTY HEARINGS

 

Case: 2003-03950, 2003-03951

Owner: Clifton and Mattie Payne

Address: 155 NW 97 St.

 

The officer, Hillary Skumanich, testified that violations still existed on the property.  Pictures were submitted to the Board as evidence of the violations.  The property owner, Mattie Payne, was there to present the case.  Mrs. Payne agreed that violations still existed on the property.  She confirmed that she is doing her best to come into compliance but that she is having financial difficulties.  She requested additional time for compliance.  After a brief discussion, Mr. Quiroga made a motion to continue the cases until December 3, 2003.  Mr. Buenconsejo seconded the motion.  Motion passed 4-3. (Mr. Asmus, Mr. Perl, and Mr. Vickers voted no).

 

Case: 2003-03902

Owner: Theodore and Penelo Petrosky

Address: 53 NW 105 St.

 

The officer, Anthony Flores, testified that a violation still existed on the property.  Pictures were submitted to the Board as evidence of the violation.  The property owner, Mr. Petrosky, was there to present the case.  Mr. Petrosky explained that he came to obtain a permit and found out that he needed a survey.  He is in the process of getting the survey and thought that he would have it before the deadline stated in the order.  Mr. Petrosky requested additional time for compliance.  After a brief discussion, Mr. Quiroga made a motion to continue the case until December 3, 2003.  Mr. Buenconsejo seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

 

Summary Adjudication:  Case #’s: 2003-03880, 2003-03935, 2003-03940, 2003-03974, 2003-04066.

 

Mr. Quiroga moved for a summary adjudication of all such cases to include a finding of fact and conclusion of law that a violation exists as charged in the respective notice of violations issued therein and that, in each case, the offending party shall correct the violation within the time period specified by the staff in the Staff recommendations for these hearings, and shall immediately notify the Code Enforcement Officer when the property is brought into compliance.  In each such case, if the violation is not brought into compliance within such time period, the Code Enforcement Officer may report this back to the Board in accordance with the Board’s rules and Regulations at which time a fine is hereby authorized to be automatically assessed against the violator in the respective daily amounts specified in Staff’s recommendations for tonight’s hearing, retroactive to the original compliance deadline, which will constitute a lean on the property of the violator.  Further, with respect to each case, costs in the amounts specified in Staff’s recommendations for tonight’s hearings are hereby assessed in order to recoup the Village’s expenses in prosecuting the violations to date.  Mr. Buenconsejo seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

 

Anthony Flores testified that affidavits of non-compliance existed in the files.

 

4.D)     REQUEST FOR RELIEF

 

Case: 8885

Owner: Nathan Rodriguez

Address: 6 NE 105 St.

 

The property owner, Nathan Rodriguez, was there to present the case.  Mr. Rodriguez stated that the notices were sent to the old owners.  He was there to request a refund of the total amount of $3,630.00, which he paid to release the lien.  Evidence in the file showed that the notices were sent to the old owners but that the property was posted.  Evidence in the file also showed that the current property owner had contact with Officer Ernst Louis in regards to the violation. The Board discussed the intentions of the property owner as an investor in Miami Shores.  They expressed their concerns in regards to giving consideration to the offer of $150.00 and refunding the rest.  The owner does not reside at the property and he is using it as an investment.  After a brief discussion, Mr. Asmus made a motion to deny the offer of $150.00 and the refund of $3,480.00.  Mr. Patnick seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

 

Case: 2000-01077, 8813

Owner: Jorge Mesa

Address: 140 NE 93 St.

 

The property owner, Jorge Mesa and his attorney Michael Kauffman, were there to present the case.  Mr. Kauffman explained that Mr. Mesa purchased the property without knowing that a lien existed.  Mr. Mesa did not have title insurance.  Mr. Kauffman explained that the property was vacant and in need of repairs.  Mr. Mesa has cured all of the violations on the property and is seeking some relief of the fines.  Officer Skumanich stated that she was very pleased to see that someone had taken care of the property and that it is now in great condition.  After a brief discussion, Mr. Buenconsejo made a motion to accept the offer of $1,734.50 payable in 15 days or the lien reverts back to the original amount of $3,965.00.  Mr. Patnick seconded the motion.  Motion passed 6-1. (Mr. Asmus voted no).

 

Case: 2002-02301, 2002-02302, 2002-02303, 6526, 6527, 8098, 9312

Owner: Andre Hilaire

Address: 46 NW 95 St.

 

The attorney, Loy Whittecker, was there to represent the property owner, Andre Hilaire.  Mr. Whittecker explained that Mr. Hilaire was ill and that he also has a language barrier because he does not speak English.  Mr. Hilaire had attended the previous meeting with an offer of $5,105.00 which was denied and was there to make a new offer of $10,500.00.  After a brief discussion of the case, Mr. Quiroga made a motion to accept the offer of $10,500.00 payable in 10 days or the lien reverts back to the original amount of $126,901.84.  Mr. Buenconsejo seconded the motion.  Motion passed 5-1.  (Mr. Perl voted no).

 

 

 

 

5.E)     NEXT MEETING

 

Mr. Quiroga made a motion that there will not be a meeting on January 1, 2004.  Mr. Vickers seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.

 

6.F)      ADJOURNMENT

 

Mr. Quiroga made a motion for adjournment.  Mr. Buenconsejo seconded the motion.  Motion passed 7-0.  The November 6, 2003, meeting of the Code Enforcement Board was adjourned at 9:10P.M.

 

           

                                                                              ____________________________________

                                                                              Mr. Barry Perl, Chairman

________________________________

Irene M. Fajardo, Recording Secretary